QQQ vs VNQ: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk

QQQ and VNQ are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. QQQ is Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1, while VNQ is Vanguard Real Estate ETF. VNQ is broader by holdings count, with 145 positions versus 107 for QQQ. VNQ has the lower expense ratio. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has VNQ ahead on AIQ Score, 56 versus 51.

Market data as of Oct 22, 2026 market close· Fund characteristics as of Oct 22, 2026
QQQ
Invesco
vs
VNQ
Vanguard
QQQ
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Issuer
Invesco
Inception
1999-03-10
VNQ
Vanguard Real Estate ETF
Issuer
Vanguard
Inception
2004-09-23

What is the main difference between QQQ and VNQ?

QQQ and VNQ have little in common: 0% of their weight is in the same securities.

Expense ratio
QQQ
0.18%
VNQ
0.13%
Lower annual fund costVNQ
Holdings
QQQ
107
VNQ
145
Broader reported basketVNQ
1Y return
QQQ
+19.6%
VNQ
+1.9%
Trailing performanceQQQ
Annualized volatility
QQQ
19.9%
VNQ
14.1%
Lower realized volatilityVNQ
MetricQQQVNQ
Fund
Expense ratio0.18%0.13%
Holdings107145
Top-10 concentration47%49.7%
Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months0.43%3.69%
Average volume37,509,6033,561,736
Performance
1Y return+19.6%+1.9%
YTD return+16.8%+4.3%
5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested+14.4%+0.5%
Risk
Annualized volatility19.9%14.1%
Max drawdown (1Y)-12.2%-12.1%
Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested-35.1%-34.5%
Beta1.450.30
Sharpe ratio0.77-0.12
Sortino ratio1.20-0.19
AlgovestIQ
AIQ Score51/10056/100
AIQ Edge Score4/106/10
Momentum21/10053/100
Risk Resilience72/10080/100

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 vs Vanguard Real Estate ETF

Data as of Oct 22, 2026· market close· Coverage 64/66 fields· High confidence
AIQ VerdictFragileAIQ Comparison Conviction 3/10

VNQ leads

VNQ leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from QQQ.

Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support VNQ, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.

Evidence agreement: 2 of 4Comparison trend: Reversed
QQQ

Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1

AIQ Score
51/100
AIQ Edge Score
4/10
VNQ

Vanguard Real Estate ETF

Leads
AIQ Score
56/100
AIQ Edge Score
6/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VNQ over QQQ, 56 versus 51 as of Oct 22, 2026. VNQ's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while QQQ holds the stronger quality profile. VNQ also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor VNQ today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. VNQ lead: Reversed — QQQ led by 16 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; VNQ now leads by 5.

Compare Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 and Vanguard Real Estate ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.

QQQ vs VNQ: which fits what

Each row is settled by a single measure. Where the gap is too small to matter it reads Similar, and no row decides the comparison as a whole.

If you wantQQQVNQFits
Lower costExpense ratio0.18%0.13%VNQ
Broader diversificationNumber of holdings107145VNQ
Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings47%49.7%Similar
Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield0.43%3.69%VNQ
Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years-35.1%-34.5%Similar
Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year19.9%14.1%VNQ

Similar means the gap is within 0.01 percentage points of expense ratio, 25% more holdings, 3 points of top-10 weight, 0.2 points of yield, 2 points of drawdown or 1 point of volatility. Past drawdowns and volatility describe the funds’ history, not their future.

Currently unavailable

Performance over time

Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes for both ETFs.

QQQ
+95.6%
VNQ
+2.5%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested

QQQ $19,562 · VNQ $10,246

Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.

Compare QQQ and VNQ against another ticker

Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.

Basic: 2 symbols·Explorer: 3 symbols·Pro and Premium: 5 symbols·Your limit: 2

AIQ Factor Divergence

Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.

QQQ advantage
0
VNQ advantage
  • Momentum21 vs 53
    VNQ +32
  • Quality82 vs 68
    QQQ +14
  • Risk Resilience72 vs 80
    VNQ +8
  • Value35 vs 33
    Even

2 of 4 evidence groups favor VNQ. VNQ’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; QQQ keeps a meaningful quality edge.

What changed since the last close

Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.

QQQ-1 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum -2

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.

VNQ+3 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum +9

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.

VNQ's lead widened by 4 AIQ points in the latest session.

Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — QQQ and VNQ both carry a full feed there.

The central trade-off

VNQ (Vanguard Real Estate ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.

QQQ (Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1): the counter-case, on quality, technicals.

Fund facts, side by side

Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.

MeasureQQQVNQWhy it matters
Expense ratio0.18%0.13%Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold.
Holdings107145More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns.
Average volume37,509,6033,561,736Liquidity — matters most if you trade size.
Annualized volatility19.9%14.1%Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure.
Max drawdown (1Y)-12.2%-12.1%The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year.
Sharpe ratio0.77-0.12Return per unit of risk. Higher is better.
Beta1.450.30Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio.

Where the exposure actually sits

Sector exposure for each fund, ordered by the size of the difference.

Communication Services12.1% vs 0.4%
Industrials5.5% vs 0.0%
Energy0.5% vs 0.1%
Technology58.8% vs 0.0%
Consumer Cyclical10.2% vs 0.0%
Consumer Defensive6.2% vs 0.0%
Healthcare4.3% vs 0.0%
Utilities1.1% vs 0.0%
QQQVNQ

How much of the same holdings they own

QQQ and VNQ share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings.

102 holdings are unique to QQQ, and 140 holdings are unique to VNQ. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

VNQ is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 49.73% of the fund, against 46.96% for QQQ (145 holdings vs 107). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.

What QQQ adds that VNQ doesn’t

HoldingQQQVNQ
NVDANVIDIA Corp8.49%Not held
AAPLApple Inc7.71%Not held
MSFTMicrosoft Corp5.88%Not held
MUMicron Technology Inc4.89%Not held
AMZNAmazon.com Inc4.36%Not held
AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc3.64%Not held

What VNQ adds that QQQ doesn’t

HoldingVNQQQQ
WELLWelltower Inc9.92%Not held
PLDPrologis Inc8.17%Not held
EQIXEquinix Inc6.09%Not held
AMTAmerican Tower Corp4.9%Not held
SPGSimon Property Group Inc4.52%Not held
DLRDigital Realty Trust Inc3.93%Not held

Each list is a fund’s largest positions by weight that the other fund does not hold, or holds at less than half the weight.

QQQ vs VNQ: five-year payout growth

QQQ grew its split-adjusted payout faster over 2020-2025 — 9.99% a year against VNQ's 0.81%.

Dividend metricQQQVNQ
5Y payout CAGR9.99%0.81%
2020 annual payout$1.737$3.335
2025 annual payout$2.795$3.472
Calendar-year declines22
Peer rank#56 of 138#127 of 138

Split-adjusted annual distributions, 2020–2025. Research as of Sep 19, 2026. Yield and expense ratio above are current values, not part of this window.

AIQ Agreement Matrix

2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor VNQ. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.

Evidence groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreVNQ51 vs 56
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationEvenValue 35 vs 33
TechnicalsQQQPrice vs 50-day -0.2% vs -2.7%; vs 200-day 6.2% vs -2.3%
Risk ResilienceVNQRisk Resilience 72 vs 80
Analyst expectationsNot coveredNot covered

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of QQQ and VNQ and are excluded from the count.

AIQ Decision Stability

Fragile

The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.

  • The AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • The lead has swung materially session to session. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)

Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on VNQ.

How the comparison changed

120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20

VNQ lead: Reversed — QQQ led by 16 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; VNQ now leads by 5.

Jun 21QQQ leads above the line · VNQ leads belowOct 20
Today
VNQ +5
51 vs 56
7 sessions ago
QQQ +3
57 vs 54
30 sessions ago
QQQ +16
65 vs 49
90 sessions ago
QQQ +16
67 vs 51

The lead changed hands 9 times in this window, most recently on Oct 19 when VNQ moved ahead of QQQ.

AIQ Signal Divergence

Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.

QQQConflicted

1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted

Only QQQ

  • Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (7.50%)
  • Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
  • MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
VNQConflicted

1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted

Only VNQ

  • Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
  • Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.48%)
  • ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (1.37%)
  • Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
  • MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon

VNQ leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.

Price vs model alignment

Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.

QQQDivergence

Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.05%, AIQ -1 points).

VNQDivergence

Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 3 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.86%, AIQ +3 points).

What would flip this result

A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.

  1. 1QQQ closes the Momentum gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to VNQ's edge.
  2. 2QQQ's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
  3. 3VNQ's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
  4. 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.

The full evidence

Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.

Performance

QQQ leads 4 of 6 windows
MetricQQQVNQ
1 week (5 sessions)-3.5%1.3%
1 month (20 sessions)-4%-1.4%
3 months (63 sessions)1.7%-6.8%
6 months (126 sessions)11.4%-3.2%
Year to date16.8%4.3%
1 year (252 sessions)19.6%1.9%

Technicals

QQQ has the stronger structure
MetricQQQVNQ
RSI (14)37.262.2
ADX (14)20.328.2
Price vs 50-day-0.2%-2.7%
Price vs 200-day6.2%-2.3%
Volatility (1M, annualized)15.4%16.2%

Risk

VNQ is the more resilient
MetricQQQVNQ
Beta1.450.3
Sharpe ratio0.77-0.12
Sortino ratio1.2-0.19
Max drawdown-12.2%-12.1%
Current drawdown-5.5%-8.6%
Annualized volatility19.9%14.1%
Value at risk (95%)-1.9%-1.4%

Straight answers

Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.

What is the difference between QQQ and VNQ?

QQQ and VNQ have little in common: 0% of their weight is in the same securities.

How much do QQQ and VNQ overlap?

QQQ and VNQ share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings. 102 holdings are unique to QQQ, and 140 holdings are unique to VNQ. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

Which ETF is more diversified, QQQ or VNQ?

VNQ holds more positions: 145 versus 107 for QQQ.

Which has the lower expense ratio?

VNQ has the lower expense ratio, 0.13% a year against 0.18% for QQQ.

Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?

VNQ, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 3.69% against 0.43% for QQQ.

Which ETF has been more volatile?

QQQ has been more volatile over the past year, at 19.9% annualized against 14.1% for VNQ.

Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?

Their worst peak-to-trough falls over the past five years are similar: -35.1% for QQQ and -34.5% for VNQ.

Compare QQQ and VNQ with others

Continue your research

This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.

How this comparison is scored

The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.

The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.

How to use side-by-side comparison →

This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.